trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

Caffeine pills increase dopamine levels in the human brain.

the verdict
REFUTED
the evidence says no
Recorded sources
0 sources for · 1 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that caffeine pills increase dopamine levels in the human brain?

No. A PET imaging study in 20 healthy adults found that 300 mg caffeine increased striatal D2/D3 receptor availability, which the authors interpret as showing caffeine does not increase dopamine in the human striatum at typical doses.

Verdict: REFUTED · 0 sources for, 1 against · Last checked

The private library was unavailable for some searches in this check. Missing library results are not evidence against the claim.

Evidence against · 1
Caffeine increases striatal dopamine D2/D3 receptor availability in the human brain.
2015
Get citation
ND, V., GJ, W., J, L., D, A., JS, F., PK, T., C, W., V, C., S, F., & D, T. (2015). Caffeine increases striatal dopamine D2/D3 receptor availability in the human brain.. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1038/tp.2015.46

2 recorded entries grouped as this source

Additional records of the same source are shown below. They are not counted as additional sources.

Caffeine increases striatal dopamine D2/D3 receptor availability in the human brain -
Get citation
Caffeine increases striatal dopamine D2/D3 receptor availability in the human brain - PMC Lock. (n.d.). pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. https://doi.org/10.1038/tp.2015.46

Receipt History
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work